Search results

This study aims to examine the writing outcomes of 6th-grade students learning English as a second language.

In all 45 students in a text structure instruction (TSI) group were compared with 45 students in a self-regulated strategy instruction (SRSI) group and 43 students receiving traditional writing instruction. SRSI was adapted from the self-regulated strategy development (SRSD) model (MacArthur et al., 2015). The SRSD model includes self-regulation writing strategies, text and genre knowledge and think-aloud modeling. Findings allowed for a comparison of TSI and SRSI, in which organization knowledge does not need to be taught using SRSD methods. Measures of writing outcomes, including writing quality and summarization of main ideas, were administered after a one-month intervention.

Results revealed that, compared with traditional instruction, the TSI and SRSI groups each exhibited better writing outcomes. Compared with the traditional instruction group, each technique had a unique impact: SRSI on writing quality, and TSI on main ideas included in written summaries. Linguistic and textual analyses of students’ writing revealed that the TSI and SRSI group learners both demonstrated high syntactic complexity, content organization and lexical variation in their compositions.

The present study provides empirical evidence that explicit teaching of SRSI writing strategies or TSI can be implemented effectively and elicit gains in elementary school L2 learners’ written output. A clear division does not exist between self-regulated writing strategies and text structure knowledge; the two techniques should be complementary, as suggested in the earlier SRSD model.

Classroom-based research has addressed the need to enhance self-regulated capacity in writing. However, writing has become more challenging for primary school learners. In addition, writing is a cognitively demanding process. The plethora of processes involved in writing may be one of the factors that caused difficulties in writing. Thus, writing proficiency relies on the development of text structure knowledge and the fostering of self-regulation capabilities.

Struggling writers and students with disabilities tend to have difficulties with multiple aspects of the writing process. Therefore, in this chapter, we describe Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD; Harris, Graham, Mason, & Friedlander, 2008). SRSD is a writing intervention with extensive research demonstrating its effectiveness for improving the writing quality of struggling writers and students with disabilities when implemented by both teachers and researchers in a variety of educational settings. We also describe an ineffective writing practice, stand-alone grammar instruction. Although this type of grammar instruction is explicit, it is removed from an authentic writing context, and decades of research have demonstrated its negative effects on students’ writing quality. We close the chapter with recommendations for future research on SRSD as well as general suggestions for teachers who provide writing instruction to struggling writers and students with disabilities.

This paper explores a five-year case example of two educators engaged in practice-based professional development (PBPD) for the Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) model in a middle school. It examines the transformative effects and challenges of improving writing instruction, the activities involved and alternative PBPD delivery methods. Highlighting a collaborative effort between an institute of higher education (IHE), a middle school and ThinkSRSD, a PBPD for SRSD developer, the example underscores the long-term benefits and innovative insights into engaging with PBPD for SRSD over multiple years.

The case involves analyzing survey data collected over five years. These surveys, which included specific SRSD-related queries and open-ended questions, were instrumental in assessing the evolution of the educators’ perceptions regarding SRSD and their engagement with PBPD. Additionally, the paper details PBPD activities as documented in a research journal, providing a comprehensive account of the developmental process.

Through a cross-institutional partnership, two middle school general educators participated in PBPD for SRSD for 30 h across five years. Their engagement with PBPD progressed from initial introduction and implementation to facilitating PBPD for SRSD among peers and at the national level. Over time, the most consistently enacted SRSD action was “memorize it,” while actions such as “discuss it,” “support it” and “independent performance” showed greater variability. Both educators consistently praised SRSD and sought continued PBPD engagement over the five years.

Our case example is the first five-year analysis of PBPD for SRSD among general middle school educators, highlighting the benefits and challenges of adopting evidence-based writing instruction. Our example emphasizes the need for continuous and focused professional development in areas crucial for student success, including self-regulation, prewriting strategies and techniques for fostering independent performance. Moreover, the two middle school educators’ critical feedback is invaluable for refining PBPD for SRSD. This work also enriches professional development schools (PDS) literature by offering effective strategies to support middle school teachers in developing a vibrant writing community, a cornerstone for student advancement in writing.

Purpose– The purpose of this chapter is to present an overview of the ways in which the Gradual Release of Responsibility (GRR) model has been enacted in the research and educational practices related to deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) children. While the term GRR is not used in the studies reviewed in this chapter, the interventions described in each study demonstrate core principles of GRR.

Methodology– The chapter provides a brief review of reading comprehension and writing intervention studies with DHH children, adolescents, and young adults. In searching for studies related to the GRR model, key words and phrases included ‘mediated/guided instruction.’

Findings– A critical review of the studies indicates an overall need for improved clarity of the ways in which educators decide when and how to release responsibility to students. In addition, the degree to which students are reported to internalize and independently apply newly learned literacy skills varies significantly. The variation prompts further examination of factors other than the instructional approach, such as intrinsic student characteristics, that might contribute to successful acquisition of skills.

Research limitations– The studies in this review represent educational practice across age/grade levels and educational settings and thus present evidence in support of the potential for implementation of a GRR model in the instructional practices of DHH students. However, because the number of studies is quite limited, we cannot generalize the findings to the diverse population of DHH students and the variety of educational settings within which DHH students are enrolled.

Practical implications– Releasing the responsibility of learning to DHH students, particularly students with a history of significant language delays and limitations, is a challenging task but certainly a possible outcome. Current educational practices are reported to all too often perpetuate a prolonged reliance of the student on the teacher. Educators are encouraged to reflect on different ways in which DHH students can be encouraged and supported in becoming more agentive in their own learning and development. A careful examination of interventions that have successfully supported students in adopting and applying effective learning strategies is needed to improve current practices.

Value– An initial search for literature related to the GRR model, that specifically addresses the needs of deaf students, produced few results. By making connections between existing reading and writing interventions and the GRR model, this chapter provides a means by which educators of deaf children can begin to frame evidence-based literacy interventions within the GRR model. Such a change may prompt deeper discussions of the need to move beyond explicit and guided instruction present in many interventions to instructional pedagogy that supports DHH students in moving toward independence.

Emergency remote teaching is not the same as a systematic, carefully thought out, and designed online learning system. Emergency remote teaching is best perceived as merely a first step towards migrating into a fully fledged, and carefully designed, virtual or online mode of study. Notwithstanding, this chapter provides a theoretical explanation that justifies the relevance and importance of emergency remote teaching in higher education practice, in light of the global COVID-19 pandemic and related discontinuities. It asserts that emergency related teaching is justified by the urgent need to maintain continuity of teaching and learning and to avoid knowledge and skills decay. A systematic approach to evaluate the effectiveness of emergency remote teaching involves measuring variables across four dimensions; that is, context, input, process, and outcomes. Weighting these dimensions is necessary to ensure that context, input, and process are prioritised above outcomes because the essence of the teaching model, when implemented, is to get it in place swiftly in order for teaching and learning to continue. The effectiveness of emergency remote teaching is best assessed on the basis of its speedy set-up and implementation to maintain continuity of teaching, not on student outcomes. The chapter investigated the approach that a sample of colleges and universities have followed to evaluate their model of emergency remote teaching and contrast it with theory. The approach found in practice was not aligned to best practice. Based on the evidence, the chapter proposes an evaluation framework that institutions can adopt specifically for evaluating emergency remote teaching practice.

Relatively limited attention has been paid to the academic needs of students with emotional and behavioral difficulties. Effective interventions are needed to support these students academically, behaviorally, and socially. The purpose of the concurrent studies reported here was to investigate the effectiveness of academic support in writing for fourth- and fifth-grade students (six boys, two girls) and second- and third-grade students (seven boys, one girl) with writing and behavioral difficulties. The Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) approach was implemented as a tier-2 intervention within a comprehensive, integrated three-tiered model of prevention including academic-, behavioral-, and social-skills components. Students learned an on-demand writing strategy for their state writing-competency test. Dependent measures included number of story writing elements, total number of words written, and writing quality. Fourth- and fifth-grade students who completed the intervention improved in total number of story elements. There were mixed results for the total number of words written and writing quality. Second- and third-grade students did not improve their total number of story elements, total words written, or writing quality. Students in both studies scored the intervention favorably, while there were mixed reactions from teachers. Findings, limitations, and suggestions for future research are discussed. Implications for the construct of evidence-based practice (EBP) are also explored, including concerns regarding frequent assessment of writing throughout intervention regardless of stage of instruction in the SRSD model.

Young children write to learn the alphabetic code, take notes to help them remember, and provide meaningful text to others. These are cognitively and linguistically complex processes. Reciprocal relationships among the development of writing, the purposes of writing, and the learners of interest impact instructional approaches and student outcomes. Teachers can increase success when they provide explicit and systematic self-regulation and writing instruction, view children as collaborators in the process, provide scaffolding that gradually shifts the responsibility to the children, and adapt instruction to meet the abilities and interests of the children. Effective instructional practices for young children with disabilities or who are at risk, are presented, for example, scaffolded writing, the use of graphic organizers, and self-regulated strategy development.

Promoting the self-determination of youth and young adults with disabilities has become best practice in the field of special education. Such efforts have been shown to positively impact student educational goal attainment, access to the general education curriculum, student involvement in educational and transition planning, and more positive postschool outcomes. This chapter discusses the self-determination construct, reviews the literature pertaining to what is known about promoting self-determination and goal attainment, and introduces assessments, evidence-based practices, and strategies for promoting student involvement.

Purpose – The gradual release of responsibility (GRR) framework has long been used as a model to provide explicit and scaffolded literacy instruction (Pearson & Gallagher, 1983), but has seen far less application within the teaching of writing. As such, a framework for further incorporating the GRR model into comprehensive writing instruction is presented.

Design – This chapter describes a recursive writing process that includes four iterative and connected steps: we study, we write, we share, and we react and revise. From direct modeling needed to build efficacy (Bloomberg & Pitchford, 2017), prompting in the “we do it together phase” (Fisher & Frey, 2016), and peer collaboration offering students the opportunity to move from the solve it together to the self-regulated stage of learning, the GRR model of writing supports students as they move recursively between the phases of learning.

Findings – The recursive nature of the GRR model of writing offers scaffolded support calibrated to each student’s phase of learning. The gradual release model of recursive writing provides an opportunity for students and teachers to engage in a feedback cycle and permit teachers to pass the pen to students at an ideal time, often encompassing many opportunities to write, react, and revise with their peers serving as an authentic audience.

Practical implications – Writing proficiency is linked to relationship building and social networks (Swan & Shih, 2005) as well as academic and career success (Cormier, Bulut, McGrew, & Frison, 2016). The GRR model of writing offers a new model of a flexible, social, and recursive writing process needed in professional development and teacher education programs.

This chapter provides a descriptive review of recent intervention research practices intended to improve the literacy skills of students with emotional or behavioral disabilities (EBD). A systematic search procedure identified 21 investigations that had been published in the past five years. These studies are described within the categories of peer-mediated literacy interventions, reading interventions, and writing interventions. Generally, it has been found that such practices as peer mediation, direct instruction (DI), cognitive text mapping, and writing strategy instruction including the Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) model have led to substantial improvement in the literacy skills of students with EBD. These strategies were apparently successful because they served generally to focus student attention and to provide cognitive models for executing literacy tasks. Implications for practice and future research are provided.